Uneven revenue distribution model picking up steam in the ACC? (The Clemson Insider)

[huskymedic]

Should be a fun week @ ACC Winter Mtgs this week:

Uneven revenue distribution model picking up steam in the ACC?

The ACC will hold winter meetings this week in Charlotte, and there’s one certain topic of conversation that administrators in attendance expect to be prevalent. “We’ll have a lot of discussions on…

theclemsoninsider.com

-> D1 Ticker summary of article for the ADD crowd:

“Clemson AD Neff says of the possibility of uneven revenue distribution within the ACC: “I’ve been pleased and optimistic about the general understanding within the league that, hey, this is something we really need to look at, and that’s not easy. I emphasize that because I don’t take it lightly. Because forever, the ACC, let alone all other conferences that I’m aware of, has been equal revenue share. So the notion of kind of jumping the ditch or really considering rolling up the sleeves on, hey, we need to look at this differently, I think there’s a really good understanding of that.” Clemson refutes arguments about an uneven model only giving more to those who already have the most by pointing out that flows the other way as well by incentivizing programs to invest. For example, Neff points to Wake Forest, who has “invested in coach retention and facilities. So they’re a great example of investment breeds success, which in theory would breed distribution.” Neff is ultimately confident the ACC will adopt a different distribution model. “We certainly have our lens at Clemson about how some of that should work. So I certainly have been pushy and very much have tried to drive that task. But, again, it’s top of mind and very present for everybody.” <-

 

[SubbaBub]

If they were smart, they kick Clemson out right now.

 

[Rufus]

Uneven revenue distribution never works out in the long run.

 

[Ha Who]

Desperation setting in as they see their brand fading

 

[CL82]

Should be a fun week @ ACC Winter Mtgs this week:

Uneven revenue distribution model picking up steam in the ACC?

The ACC will hold winter meetings this week in Charlotte, and there’s one certain topic of conversation that administrators in attendance expect to be prevalent. “We’ll have a lot of discussions on…

theclemsoninsider.com

-> D1 Ticker summary of article for the ADD crowd:

“Clemson AD Neff says of the possibility of uneven revenue distribution within the ACC: “I’ve been pleased and optimistic about the general understanding within the league that, hey, this is something we really need to look at, and that’s not easy. I emphasize that because I don’t take it lightly. Because forever, the ACC, let alone all other conferences that I’m aware of, has been equal revenue share. So the notion of kind of jumping the ditch or really considering rolling up the sleeves on, hey, we need to look at this differently, I think there’s a really good understanding of that.” Clemson refutes arguments about an uneven model only giving more to those who already have the most by pointing out that flows the other way as well by incentivizing programs to invest. For example, Neff points to Wake Forest, who has “invested in coach retention and facilities. So they’re a great example of investment breeds success, which in theory would breed distribution.” Neff is ultimately confident the ACC will adopt a different distribution model. “We certainly have our lens at Clemson about how some of that should work. So I certainly have been pushy and very much have tried to drive that task. But, again, it’s top of mind and very present for everybody.” <-

“So it’s not just, hey, Clemson, Florida State and Miami, because you’re big brands, you’re going to get more slice of the pie. It’s not the rudimentary, and that’s not my lens either. But it should be based on performance – football success, postseason, CFP, how you help drive television viewership and metrics, things like that.”

So basically, the football schools are declaring war on the schools with basketball tradition and success. “You’re a traditional basketball power? Sorry don’t care.”

 

[Chin Diesel]

“So it’s not just, hey, Clemson, Florida State and Miami, because you’re big brands, you’re going to get more slice of the pie. It’s not the rudimentary, and that’s not my lens either. But it should be based on performance – football success, postseason, CFP, how you help drive television viewership and metrics, things like that.”

So basically, the football schools are declaring war on the schools with basketball tradition and success. “You’re a traditional basketball power? Sorry don’t care.”

Pretty disingenuous to call Miami a brand which brings in revenue. Me thinks UNC, UVA and a few others are much stronger brands.

 

[uconntailgater]

I would imagine they would include North Carolina and Virginia as the schools to get a full share? Clemson, Florida State, Miami, North Carolina and Virginia are the most valuable properties in the ACC.

 

[CL82]

Pretty disingenuous to call Miami a brand which brings in revenue. Me thinks UNC, UVA and a few others are much stronger brands.

I would imagine they would include North Carolina and Virginia as the schools to get a full share? Clemson, Florida State, Miami, North Carolina and Virginia are the most valuable properties in the ACC.

I would think any revenue sharing arrangement in which either UVA or UNC doesn’t receive a top share is a recipe for those schools to go to the Big 10.

 

[Stinger92860]

Uneven revenue distribution COULD help us get an invite

 

[SubbaBub]

Double speak. Brand = FB success. That equals better performance payments. Wake Forest will never be good enough for long enough to he in the top half of ACC revenue under this model.

 

[Kolumbo]

This guy makes solid points and I'd imagine they follow this on an hourly basis

Uneven revenue distribution model picking up steam in the ACC? - The Clemson Insider Forums

Uneven revenue distribution model picking up steam in the ACC? The Rock

forums.theclemsoninsider.com

"Interesting that it will get a discussion. I could only see this get steam if conference members actually think the GoR is vulnerable. That’s the only leverage I can see that the few football schools have. Meanwhile, Philips is promoting a football focused future for the conference while the smaller schools are asked to invest in football with a “potential” future payoff. Finally, the entire conference has fallen significantly behind on media rights revenue. No school is going to get a larger share such that they get anywhere close to the Big10 or SEC payouts.

This will not happen unless or until half the conference is in real jeopardy of being relegated to a G5 conference future."

 

[Hondo 77]

That will be the death of the ACC. Not that I'd shed any tears after what they did to the Big East.

 

[noeynox]

Should be where the ACC says ok but stretches that GOR even further into infinity. I don't think schools like UNC or UVA go for it since they can likely have their choice of Big Ten or SEC when the current GOR nears expiration.

 

[metsfan2323]

Clearly BC doesn't deserve the same payout as Clemson, the problem is where do you draw the line? Maybe some type of sliding scale base on performance. It seems like a good idea and a terrible idea at the same time.

From a UCONN perspective I have to believe a full share B12 offer would be better than a partial ACC offer. A half share B1G offer would beat them both.

 

[huskymedic]

Tick, tick, tick…

 

[huskymedic]

FSU fires warning shot to ACC: ‘Something has to change’

A trustee asked whether a buyout to leave the ACC was feasible. The answer wasn’t “no.”

www.tampabay.com

-> Alford said he and other FSU administrators are in “deep discussions” about how to close that gap until the ACC’s current media rights deal expires in 2036. Alford said FSU will look at windows if conference realignment significantly affects the Pac-12, for example. One possibility would be for the ACC to begin weighing its conference payouts toward programs that have more success or are larger brands. <-

 

[FlippinCrazy!]

The 15% of value that FSU is claiming sheds a lot of light on the other schools worth. Between FSU, Miami, and Clemson, those schools likely are making up 40-50% of the value, though I’d guess closer to the 50% side if not higher. Throw in UNC and Duke, that number may be looking more like 55% - 70% of value (again I’m more inclined itd be closer to that 70% than the 55%).

Let’s say they truly went on a sliding scale based on revenue add. If the rest of the 10 schools added a combined 30% of value to the league, that means on average those schools would be paid out about $18MM on average. There’s going to be a lot of unhappy members in that conference if that happens.

I wonder if this is a way to essentially force out some of the lesser members in the conference (no need to say it but BC specifically lol). I know conferences rarely ever kick out members, but if I was FSU or Clemson and getting the same payout as BC for decades now, I’d be pissed.

 

[Hoophound]

It’s hard to say how that would work. BC has stunk, but they are probably a bigger brand than Wake Forest. Wake has actually been pretty good on the field though. Anyway, it seems like after FSU, Clemson and maybe UNC, it would be tough to establish who is worth what.

 

[CL82]

BC has stunk, but they are probably a bigger brand than Wake Forest.

I’m not so sure about that

 

[huskymedic]

 

[CL82]

The plot thickens…

So, the really interesting question is if you are one of the lesser lights in the ACC is there greater value in you taking a reduced share in order to keep FSU and Clemson in the conference, or does it make more sense to let them try and break the GOR and then live off their exit fee and GOR settlement payment plus a reduced amount from ESPN?

 

[businesslawyer]

Clearly BC doesn't deserve the same payout as Clemson, the problem is where do you draw the line? Maybe some type of sliding scale base on performance. It seems like a good idea and a terrible idea at the same time.

From a UCONN perspective I have to believe a full share B12 offer would be better than a partial ACC offer. A half share B1G offer would beat them both.

You're seriously comparing an offer we don't have with other offers we don't have?

 

[businesslawyer]

The 15% of value that FSU is claiming sheds a lot of light on the other schools worth. Between FSU, Miami, and Clemson, those schools likely are making up 40-50% of the value, though I’d guess closer to the 50% side if not higher. Throw in UNC and Duke, that number may be looking more like 55% - 70% of value (again I’m more inclined itd be closer to that 70% than the 55%).

Let’s say they truly went on a sliding scale based on revenue add. If the rest of the 10 schools added a combined 30% of value to the league, that means on average those schools would be paid out about $18MM on average. There’s going to be a lot of unhappy members in that conference if that happens.

I wonder if this is a way to essentially force out some of the lesser members in the conference (no need to say it but BC specifically lol). I know conferences rarely ever kick out members, but if I was FSU or Clemson and getting the same payout as BC for decades now, I’d be pissed.

Except that Clemson and FSU voluntarily voted to allow BC in knowing there was an equal division of conference revenues.

Pissed is the wrong word. You don't get to marry the math club captain and then be pissed you didn't marry the head cheerleader. They want to change the historical basis for sharing revenues. Within the limitations of their existing agreements (or their right to break them and pay damages), they have the right and ability to do that.

 

[gars44]

https://www.on3.com/teams/florida-state-seminoles/

 

[MilliniumPrince]

The smaller brands will ultimately do as they are told, because being 2nd class in the ACC is better than the alternative. That said, someone will fight this once they realize the larger programs consider them 2nd class.

The first question: in which category do you place a post- Coach K Duke?